Singapore Girl’s blue eyeshadow is very 80s

Posted on April 3, 2013 by gdy2shoez

From ‘ Singapore Girl gets a makeover’, 3 April 2013, article by Karamjit Kaur, ST

THE Singapore Girl has junked her bright blue eyeshadow for a more subtle and modern look. She is still immaculate in her body-hugging signature kebaya with her hair nicely done, but the colours on her face are less striking.

In her first major makeover in more than a decade, the iconic Singapore Airlines (SIA) Girl is sticking to blue, green, plum and brown eye make-up, and red lipstick to complement the colours of her kebaya. But the tones and shades are more subtle than before and trendier, said the airline’s head of cabin crew, Mr Marvin Tan. “When we embarked on this project with our long-time grooming partner Lancome, we took into account feedback from some customers that the previous colours seemed to be on the strong side,” he told The Straits Times last week.

…Freelance make-up artist Dollei Seah believes that SIA is taking the right step. “Wearing a blue outfit with blue make-up is very 80s. You can keep the blue but it should not be too much and it should be blended with other shades to create a more natural look.”

…Businessman Alex Wong, 53, said: “I’m glad the SIA Girl is moving towards a softer look. I do think some of them are too heavily made up, especially when compared with girls from other carriers.”

SIA ‘blue’ it when it came to eyeshadow colour choice

In 2007, David Keith,  president of Asia Pacific, Garner International, urged SIA to ‘get rid of the blue eyeshadow from the days when the Beatles were stomping around’. Experts in the field call it ‘very 80s’, while others mock her ‘screaming red lipstick and over-the-top blue eyeshadow’.  Blogger ‘The Last Alpha Male’ says it ‘basically looks good only if you’re WHITE‘ and ‘not in uniform’. I’m no fashion guru, but it seems blue eyeshadow doesn’t appear to as out-of-date as it’s claimed to be. The ‘electric blue’ look has been pulled off by celebrities such as Katy Perry and Rihanna as recent as 2009. I don’t know how it works on the Asian face without turning out like the evil character in some Chinese opera, or a Japanese manga fairy.

Gyaru blue

With the body-hugging, impractical kebaya still remaining as the signature icon of our Singapore Girl, I’m not sure how this ‘toning down’ of makeup is in any way a ‘makeover’. It’s like trimming your eyebrows or piercing a new earhole and declaring that you’re a ‘new you’. Singapore Girls still bun up their hair, waddle around gingerly and are probably the only stewardesses in the world who wear slippers during work. Having creepy eyeshadow hasn’t stopped our SIA girls from being voted among the world’s  ‘hottest’ stewardesses either, at the risk of their brand being labelled as ‘sexist’ still.

In fact, bright blue eyeshadow is scarcely noticeable from SIA ads and promos in the past, and I suspect feedback of SIA girls looking like the they’re auditioning for a Chinese Ghost Story are purely anecdotal, or exaggerated.

An example of overzealous use of blue makeup however, comes off a Wikipedia page. Even then, I personally have never been shocked by one, or at least not to extent that I thought that I was on an interplanetary flight to Pandora, planet of Avatar, instead of onboard a SIA plane.

The 'new' look

The ‘new’ look

Maybe it’s a guy thing. I wish I could say this tiny change ‘blue’ me away, but it doesn’t. So what gives? Is this an ‘out-of-the-blue’ marketing stunt to get people interested in the Singapore Girl once more? It’s not as if more people will flock to book SIA tickets now because their stewardesses look less like Abba. I personally never had a problem with our SIA girls looking like Twiggy or a roller skating disco dolly (maybe because I can’t afford to fly with them so often) as long as their reputable service standards are up to par, but it’s not so much the putting on of heavy makeup that bothers me, but the putting on of fake accents. No amount of physical grace or ‘subtle, trendy’ shades of blue will compensate for pretentious English in my opinion.

Still a great way to fly, no doubt, but the feathers on this majestic bird haven’t changed one bit.

About these ads

Filed under: 2000s, 2013, Advertisements, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

SIA steward arrested for smuggling heroin

Posted on March 24, 2013 by gdy2shoez

From ‘SIA steward arrested in Sydney for alleged drug offence’, 24 March 2013, article by Ng Jing Yng, Today

A Singapore Airlines (SIA) cabin crew member was arrested last Sunday at Sydney International Airport after he allegedly tried to bring in 1.6kg of heroin.

Nicholas Tan Ngat Liang, 50, was a leading steward who was believed to be on duty during the flight from Singapore to Sydney. In response to TODAY’s queries, a spokesperson from the Australian Federal Police confirmed that a 50-year-old Singaporean was arrested on Sunday and has been charged with “importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug, namely heroin”. “The man was arrested for attempting to import 1.6kg of heroin into Australia,” the spokesperson said.

In Australia, the offence carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and/or an A$825,000 fine (S$1.1 million). Tan’s case was first mentioned in a New South Wales court on Monday.

It’s not reported how Tan carried his stash, all 1.6kg of it, but he is only one of several  Singaporeans who have tried their luck with drug trafficking Down Under.

In 2008, a Singaporean drug mule was caught by Australian authorities with 91 packets of heroin in his stomach (net weight 286 g of heroin), and was forced to defecate the goods over 2 days in a hospital. In 2009, two of our countrymen were raided whilst in a taxi carrying $4.5 million worth of the stuff. Last year, one was caught by Melbourne police smuggling 5kg of the same substance in a heap of Chinese books, while another 2 Singaporeans were charged for stowing 4.5kg of it in a vehicle and a service apartment (Sydney). The most sensational Aussie drug bust to date involving a Singaporean was that of Tan Wee Quay, who was part of a North Korean ‘Pong Su’ ploy to ship in 150kg of heroin in 2003.  According to reports, he was born in the ‘Golden Triangle’ and once blasted his way (with the help from some friends in the heroin business) out of a Danish prison in 2001. He was sentenced to 24 years imprisonment and remains there till this day, being ‘held in high regard’ for his skills as an interpreter. Tan would have been gone in a whiff if he was caught in his home country.

At the rate of our own citizens being hauled up by Aussie police, the perception of government-fearing, law-abiding Singaporeans making perfect drug mules doesn’t hold anymore, even if you’re part of our prestigious airline crew. In the 1980′s, SIA crew members were detained for suspected smuggling of GOLD, once in Seoul, and another incident in Kathmandu. But bad behaviour wasn’t restricted to sneaking in illicit drugs or precious metals. In 2008, A PILOT captain was snared for having child pornography on his laptop (again in Australia, Adelaide to be precise). A chief and leading steward were arrested in Denmark for using a passenger’s credit card to go on a shopping spree in 1982. In 1995, steward Zaini Jeloni was charged for the rape and murder of his female colleague (and alleged lover), Chang Yu, in Los Angeles. There’s even a hint of the paranormal about Chang Yu’s murder and some spooky association with the SQ006 crash in 2000, Taipei (the deceased was of Taiwanese descent).

Maybe it’s the long hours spent airborne and psychological stress of jetlag, or the wrangling over salary and leave entitlements that have plagued the airline of late that drives some SIA personnel to desperation and wilful wrongdoing.  If I were a jetsetting cabin crew myself, I would imagine my experience with immigration checkpoints giving me an edge in couriering contraband too. But why Australia, with its hefty penalty of life imprisonment and its experience in apprehending Singaporeans? The last count of Singaporeans in Australia stands around 50,000. Nobody knows how many of those residing are dope fiends or crime lords, but if you’ve got connections, and you’re an extreme risk-taker at your wits’ end, Australia was probably still a better bet than, say, the chance of execution by firing squad in Vietnam.

Incidentally, Australian drug trafficker Nguyen Tuong Van was hanged in Changi Prison in 2005 (the first to be executed in more than a decade) for carrying 400g of heroin into the country. Tan Ngat Liang had 4 times that amount with him in Sydney.

Filed under: 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, 2013, Drugs, Funerals/Death, Justice system/Lawsuits, Sex, Singapore Airlines, Violence | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Scoot uniform like Star Trek

Posted on June 24, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Scoot or Star Trek?’ 24 June 2012, article by Cheryl Faith Wee, Sunday Times

Tennis outfit, Star Trek uniform or Yves Saint Laurent couture? New budget airline Scoot’s cabin crew attire has caught some people’s attention – but not always in a good way. While parent company Singapore Airlines has seen its fortunes soar, thanks in part to the iconic sarong kebaya worn by its stewardesses, Scoot’s sporty, stretchy sheath has drawn criticism from some passengers.

Mr Jourdan Ng, 29, who works in the finance industry, took a Scoot flight to Sydney two weeks ago. He says the black and yellow body-skimming V-neck dress accentuates curves, but ‘for quite a lot of the stewardesses, it is not very flattering’. ‘The sporty material of the dress makes them look like they had just finished a game of tennis before coming on board,’ he adds. ‘It might be a bit too casual.’

…Local corporate design and production house Esta designed the uniforms for the budget carrier, which started operating flights earlier this month. Male cabin crew wear polo T-shirts with midnight-blue jeans. Esta creative director Esther Tay, 58, says the dress was inspired by current fashion silhouettes and took about a month to design. Its curved, contouring panels are meant to be understated yet chic and stylish.

Similarly, fresh graduate Christine Song, 23, who is contemplating booking a Scoot flight to Australia later this year, says the design ‘does not have that professional uniform feel and is just like a formal work dress’.

… Keith Png of clothing boutique Hide & Seek, who designs his own labels Koops and Keith Png Bespoke, likens the Scoot uniform to an evening dress from the Yves Saint Laurent 1966 Autumn-Winter collection – a long couture dress in navy-blue wool, encrusted with a pink silhouette that resembles a woman’s arched body. Png, 34, says: ‘Scoot’s uniform resembles this signature dress and I like it.’

As ‘iconic’ and timeless as SIA’s uniform is, it’s easy to forget that  the sarong kebaya, and even the stewardesses’ slippers, have also been criticised in the past for lacking functionality and professionalism. Ditch the stifling elegance for something more ‘casual’ and you get passengers complaining that they were suited up at World of Sports. If I needed a flight attendant to rush to my aid on a plane, I’d probably have a higher chance of survival if my rescuer wore something ‘tennis-friendly’ rather than tiptoe gingerly to my seat in a shrink-wrap kebaya. If I were held hostage by a terrorist, it would also be comforting to know that somewhere in the back someone is whispering orders to ‘Set Phasers On Stun’.

Wimble-scoot

Personally, I think the female dress has its own kooky, adventurous style which fits the whimsy way the budget airline is named, despite making the ladies look like one of Marvel’s original Avengers, the WASP. The male top and dark pants however, as flaunted previously a few months back when the uniform was first launched, made them look like flight technicians rather than flight stewards, or like ground crew who load up baggage instead of cabin crew. Even the waiters at Crystal Jade dress better than this. Taking the plunge from SIA’s suit and tie to T-shirt is stretching the dress code from  ‘casual’ to ‘laidback slacker’.  Not sure if ESTA had changed the design to the current ‘polo-T’ since then, but they should at least consider making them a sleeker, tighter-fit if you want men to command greater presence like Jean-Luc Picard  instead of being mistaken for ball-boy stowaways.

Marvel’s own Tinkerbell

Koops’ Keith Png, on the other hand, summons YSL retro stylings, comparing the female dress to something more glamorous befitting of a catwalk. Such arty affection for something as mundane as a budget airline uniform could also explain the similarity in the playful tones between his fashion label Koops and Scoot. Here, there’s no ‘pink silhouette’ of an arched female anatomy, just a stripe of yellow that mimics the markings of winged stinging insects rather than high fashion. More ‘cartoon’ than ‘couture’, rather.

Yes, Scoot Lives

 

Filed under: 2012, Dress sense, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fly with Scoot Airlines

Posted on August 25, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Scoot? Likely name of SIA’s budget carrier’, 25 Aug 2011, article in asiaone.com

Scoot Airlines may well be the name of Singapore Airlines’ long-haul budget offshoot.

The Straits Times reported that it ran checks and found that New Aviation, SIA’s wholly owned subsidiary that will run the new entity, has registered “Scoot” as the trademark with the Intellectual Property of Singapore.

When ST asked SIA if “Scoot” was indeed the name chosen for the carrier, company spokesman Nicholas Ionides neither confirmed nor denied the finding.

He said: “Several names have been under consideration, but the management of the new airline is not able to confirm details of the branding at this stage.” The carrier is slated for launch by the middle of next year

Scoot would be an apt name to call an Autobot that transforms into a, well, scooter, but not a budget carrier. Scoot has a zippy, light-hearted exhilarative feel about it, but passengers don’t want a plane sounding like promiscuous bumblebee. They prefer something with a ‘Air’ or ‘Jet’ in it to provide the assurance that the plane actually stays in the air as it’s supposed to, especially for a long haul flight. Air travel is serious business, and even if the risk of a plane being disabled by lightning is next to zero, somehow the thought of ‘Scoot’ Airlines braving turbulence wouldn’t bode well even for the hardiest traveler.

It’s a name you can use for a hang-glider or a World War One biplane,  basically any cute contraption that whirls, spins and chugs as you manoeuvre it, but using it on a carrier  is like giving your bodyguard a name like ‘Twerp’,  ‘Squirt’ or ‘PePe’. You don’t have to be majestic about it, but neither should one give an SIA offshoot a name that can pass off as one of the Seven dwarfs, a zesty carbonated drink (Scoot is It!), a dishwashing liquid (Scoot germs away!) or even a Pokemon (Scoot! I choose you!). Scoot gives a sense of jittery lightness and  smallness, and worse, it carries faecal connoations because Scoot sounds like a hybrid of scat and poo and is onomatopoeia for a wet fart all at the same time.

The word scoot is even outdated in today’s context, and probably hasn’t been seen anywhere in popular media since Archie comics ( ‘Hey, Jughead, could you scoot over and grab me a milkshake?). But here’s a list of rather twee low-cost airline names: Mango (South Africa), Firely ( Malaysia), Wizz *snigger* Air (Hungary). The closest names to ‘Scoot’ are from Canada, ‘Zip’ and ‘Zoom’ Airlines, both now defunct and proof that you should never use action words implying haste in your airline names. One of the worst names ever imagined belonged to an Australian carrier (IMPULSE airlines), which was subsequently renamed to the less dangerous sounding ‘Jetstar’. They might as well have named it ICARUS AIR. So, branding is important for airlines just like any commercial product, which brings me to the evolution of our very successful SIA.

The first suggestions following the Malaysia-Singapore Airlines split in 1971 to register our very own carrier included the likes of National Singapore Airline and MAJULAH Singapore Airline, which is understandable in light of the patriotism behind this pivotal moment in aviation history. In 1972, someone thought of  ‘Mercury Singapore Airlines’, which has a cosmic element to it, though Mercury is the smallest planet (excluding Pluto) and closest to the Sun.  Thankfully, we settled on the simplicity of Singapore Airlines, though SIA has had more than its fair share of success thanks to its stewardesses and a suggestive tagline rather than the brand name itself.

Filed under: 1970s, 2011, Names, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

SIA stewardesses sleeping on plane

Posted on June 15, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From SQ air stewardesses caught napping, 14 June 2011, article in insing.com translated from SM Daily

Some SQ air stewardesses were caught in the act: Taking a nap right next to passengers.

A curious passenger, Mr Tan, took a photo of two stewardesses sleeping on empty seats during a flight from New Zealand. He was flying home from Christchurch, New Zealand via Singapore Airlines when he saw the scene. When he was interviewed by The New Paper, he said he saw some stewardesses sleeping in the last few rows of economy class.

“My flight lasted about nine hours, and I was surprised to see flight stewardesses taking a nap right next to passengers.”

He said that the stewardesses were obviously asleep and yet some passengers kept pestering them for drinks.

Mr Tan wondered why the stewardesses were so tired, and whether the company had given them enough time to rest.

I guess refreshments won't be served anytime soon

Somewhere in that article must be an invisible complaint about how bad this is for the Singapore Girl’s reputation, but instead the person who took this picture was wondering why passengers were trying to wake them up for drinks and questioning staff welfare. It would be the saddest irony that this shot, originally intended to suggest that the Singapore Girl is ‘overworked’, will no doubt be interpreted by everyone else as the exact opposite. Just see how cosy they are. I’m jealous that they look more cosy than me when I’m flying long haul. If this is SIA’s idea of power napping, then God help us all in a real emergency when every second counts.

Fine, we don’t want to know goes on among Singapore Girls behind the lavatories on long haul flights. Maybe they do shift napping on their cabin stations, kill time freshening up the toilets (or themselves), gossip about difficult passengers, whatever to stave off the sheer boredom without the luxury of a passenger entertainment system or an internet connection – I don’t want to know. What attendants do after landing, whether it’s smoking outside terminals or kiao-kar-ing away, is none of my business. But the least our girls could do, tens of thousands of feet up in the air, is to give plane insomniacs like myself the assurance that we’re not the only ones wide awake when all other passengers are blissfully asleep, and that someone on the plane is always ready to jump to my rescue and wrap an oxygen mask around my face if I suffer a panic attack, or collect my airbag after I’ve vomited into it. In fact, this image, assuming that it’s not some staged viral prank (as much as I’d hope it to be), is taking  ‘kiao-kar-ing’ to the next, and in fact highest achievable, level. If Singapore Girls can snuggle up on unoccupied seats, it’s only fair that passengers can do the same. In fact, it is imperative that passengers take up whatever empty seat that is available, just to prevent our stewardesses from using them. Alas, that’s often not the case, even if you’re suffering from severe air sickness. Of course, stewardesses aren’t the only uniformed people caught sleeping ‘on the job’, it happens to our NSmen too.

Filed under: 2011, Customer service, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Airsick SIA passenger not allowed change of seat

Posted on June 14, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Passenger disagrees with airline’, 14 June 2011, ST Forum online

(Law Cher Khiam): I REFER to Singapore Airlines’ reply (“Why passenger was not allowed to change seat”; May 31) to my letter (“Service goes out the window amid SIA balancing act”; May 27).

It was a 6am flight, and there must have been about 30 empty seats from economy class row 30 to 54 on that flight (54D was the seat given to me).

I checked with my aviation and pilot friends and contrary to SIA’s reply, I am told that I could have easily been given one of these seats up front (to alleviate my severe air sickness) without compromising the safety of the flight. I didn’t specify any seat and any attempt to move me forward – even if it was a row or two – would have been appreciated.

No attempt was made to help me despite my plea.

The arrogant manner in which I was brushed off at the airport by two of the senior staff there hurt as much SIA’s reply. This is definitely not the sort of service one would expect from the world’s most awarded airline.

The initial complaint was about SIA’s refusal to allow Mr Law to change seats citing ‘plane balance’ and safety as a reason. No information on how far exactly the complainant would want to be moved from his position at the time, but would moving ‘a row or two’, as he now claims, make any difference for ‘SEVERE’ air sickness? In his first letter ‘Service goes out the window..’ (May 27), he in fact states:

…She refused to give me a seat further up front even though I explained to her that I experience giddy spells sitting behind (for example, when the plane hits turbulence).

I then sought the help of the supervisor, but was told the same reason: They couldn’t give me a seat further up front because they needed to “balance the plane”.

So, if you’re on the verge of puking your lungs out, what does one intend exactly by ‘further up front’? Moving ‘a row or two’? I don’t think so.Would flight attendants even suggest that he move one row up at the risk of sounding silly and getting scolded for it? Naturally, in that situation, one would assume a fair distance away from Mr Law’s seat, and you can imagine the affected staff reading this and going ‘Aiyah..NOW then you tell me..’. This is like saying ‘Oh I would have appreciated if NTUC exchanged my maggot ridden apple with something slightly rotten’. It’s common behavior of complainants to adjust their expectations in hindsight to make them appear less unreasonable as they very well could be in the beginning. I could scream at a cyclist for ramming into me for being ‘a bloody blind  bastard’ in the heat of the moment, but later downplay the situation politely i.e inaccurately in a complaint letter with a euphemistic ‘I told him sternly to watch where he’s going’.

But back to SIA’s ‘arrogant response’ by Divisional Vice President Xavier Lim(May 31, ST Forum):

…Mr Law’s flight was nose-heavy. To ensure safe operations, we had to ensure that some passengers were seated towards the rear to achieve the correct balance for take-off. After take-off, passengers would be able to change to the forward seats if they are available.

Mr Law expressed his unhappiness to our staff over his seat arrangement. We are sorry that we could not accede to his request but cannot, under any circumstances, compromise the safety of our flight operations and that of other passengers.

Aeronautic physics aside, did either the complainant or the attendants think of asking someone in front to exchange seats?A little basic human beneficiary could have saved all the embarrassment really. Still, if Mr Law was well aware of his condition, why weren’t precautions taken? If he runs the risk of overflowing his airbag, how about bringing along some motion sickness tablets which you can buy off a pharmacy, or from a doctor for more potent ones? Motion sickness is mostly preventable, and by means other than bossing flight attendants around. It’s unlike peanut allergy sufferers having to risk anaphylactic shock with peanut dust floating around the plane.  Still, this is a masterful ‘I’ve got the Last Word’ letter, with a cunning post-hoc  ‘I’m really not asking for much’ disclaimer and a shaming whopper of a finish that would leave any organisation speechless.  Please save as a template if you are ever find yourself inconvenienced by SIA, be it lack of legspace, crappy food or failure to understand what stewardesses are saying. You may even get a free business class upgrade if you’re lucky.

Filed under: 2011, Customer service, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

SIA does not have a nut-free environment

Posted on February 1, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Airline should take peanut allergy seriously’, 1 Feb 2011, ST Forum online

(Ai-Leng Hong): ON A Singapore Airlines (SIA) flight from Auckland to Singapore on Dec 13, my seven-year-old son experienced an anaphylactic reaction by inhaling peanut dust released when peanut snack packs were opened during the flight.

Despite earlier requests to not serve peanuts on board, SIA would not accommodate our request as it had stopped its “nut-free environment on board” policy.

Fortunately, my son did not die from that anaphylactic reaction as we had an adrenalin injection pen which we administered to him.

Following advice given by a senior crew member, we lodged another request to SIA to not serve peanut snacks on our scheduled return trip on Jan 11. Unfortunately, the airline refused to not serve peanuts on board.

…The commercial imperative is clear: Serve peanuts and neglect the duty of care that the airline has to provide a safe environment for all its passengers – including those suffering from allergies.

It would take a philosopher to distill the moral ambiguity in this situation, whether it is ethical for airlines to deprive hundreds of passengers of peanuts in order to prevent one child of unnecessary suffering or even death.  This peanut problem is confounded by locality and circumstance, namely passengers bounded by a common recycled breathing space, with barely elbow room between each other and complicit in the knowledge that slightest disturbance could affect every single person on board. Now, hypothetically, if I had a rare disease, not unlike the prevalence of anaphylactic peanut allergy, which  predisposes me to shock and epileptic fits whenever I smell life jackets,  wouldn’t it then be utterly unreasonable of me to request the airlines to remove all life jackets on board? All kinds of fatal hazards may occur on a plane which may not necessarily involve peanut allergens. Stagnant legspace may have a blood clot shuttling to my lungs while watching inflight Lord of the Rings trilogy. I may choke on a fish bone, or a baby could get smothered purple by a pillow while sleeping, does that give people the right to demand for wider aisles, ban all food with bones, or pillows?

The question then, is how preventable we deem peanut allergy to be such that appropriate precautions can be taken without inconveniencing others, and if it happens that someone on board is hypersensitive short of putting him in an aseptic bubble, I’m sure some understanding and sacrifice on the part of passengers, out of a simple concern for a fellow traveller, to open their peanut packs carefully in vacuum sealed bags or just keep them for later, would probably make the flight pleasant and hazard free for everyone without calling for a total nutty ban altogether. Still, it’s probably unfair of the complainant to blame SIA for not fostering a safe environment just because they expose passengers to peanuts, when they are so many other safety checks in place to ensure the damn plane doesn’t go up in flames and kill everyone, not just allergy sufferers. So, in the grand scheme of things, for hiring competent pilots, for having a decent ventilation system, for making sure the wings don’t fall apart, I would say that SIA is already taking good care of the majority of passengers, in terms of preventing what kills MOST people, whether or not they ban peanuts on board. They may have to do something about serving business class hysteria-causing drunken chicken though.

Postcript: In a SIA response on 3 Feb 2011, ST Forum online ‘SIA does offer nut-free meals’ (The first day of Chinese New Year mind you), Senior Vice President of Products and Services Tan Pee Teck stated that ‘…from 2002 to mid-2009, we offered to remove nuts and meals containing nuts and nut-derivatives from the class of travel the requesting passenger was on. However, we received numerous feedback from customers questioning this policy.’ i.e we tried to but got complaints by passengers who insist on peanuts. You just can’t please everyone really, and all this fuss over some nuts on a plane.

 

Filed under: 2011, Customer service, Local food, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Appetiser for destruction

Posted on January 12, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘ 新航提供‘醉鸡’ 乘客担心坠机’, 12 Dec 2010, article in omy.sg (LHWB)

一名新加坡航空公司乘客申诉，在从新加坡飞往上海的班机，所提供的开胃菜“醉鸡”与“坠机”谐音，让他一路大感不吉利，足足5小时起鸡皮疙瘩、忐忑不安，直到飞机安然降陆才放心！

卓佳强是在本月3日搭乘SQ836到上海。他在投给《联合早报》的函件中，叙述这段经历。他说，飞机起飞后，他翻阅菜单的中餐部分，惊见“醉鸡”是开胃菜，“吓了一跳”。根据他的说法，“醉鸡”与“坠机”谐音，一般上华人为朋友饯行时，都避开这道江南小菜“醉鸡”。

卓佳强指出，这个航班服务的主要是中国旅客，用如此“不吉利”的菜肴为开胃菜很不恰当。

They served this on 9/11

Translation: A business class passenger with SIA got the shock of his life upon being served a drunken chicken appetiser on board, which in Chinese is the phonetic equivalent of ‘dropping out of an airplane’. The very inauspiciousness of the dish turned the writer into a nervous wreck for the remaining 5 hours of the flight, suggesting that, with a clientele of mostly Chinese passengers, SIA should take this har-winger of ultimate disaster off the menu.

And all this while I thought SIA’s business class caters to intelligent men of exquisite taste and discerning pleasures, not country bumpkin soothsayers who subscribe to pagan superstitions, numerology and the belief that a poorly named poultry dish will wrench the stars out of their alignment and lay an infernal curse on the engines of an airplane. Imagine the sheer pants-wetting anxiety of such complainants whenever they encounter something on a menu that foreshadows imminent death wherever they go, be it a Swensen’s ‘Earthquake’ ice cream on the top floor of a shopping mall or ‘Shark’s Fin’ on a sailboat. Even if you serve them rice and soggy cabbage instead to ward off any evil lurking in those inflight food trolleys, such people will see patterns emerging from the remnants of their meal that resemble nothing less than skull and crossbones, or a apocalyptic picture of biblical devastation, hellish fire, brimstone and all. We already have passengers complaining that inflight food is too boring, yet when you style it up a bit and give it fancy gourmet names, they blame you for portending doom for all on board. Superstitious passengers should just spend the entirety of their flight time with their eye-masks on, headsets tuned to the spa channel and starve themselves, preferably to death before suffering a far worse fate of a crash orchestrated by an evil drunken chicken. Top contender of the Most Kiasi complaint award.

Filed under: 2011, Customer service, Local food, Singapore Airlines, Superstitions | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Those sad Tom Thumb sandwiches

Posted on December 30, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Disappointed with same meals served on board SIA’, 30 Dec 2010, Today online

(Alessandro Santise): I have been a regular customer of Singapore Airlines, which is reputed for its service.

But after flying the Paris-Singapore route several times over the years, I noticed that the meals served on board have been always the same. I do not even need to look at the menu to know what I will be eating.

This is very disappointing as I expect SIA would continually strive to improve its service. In fact, upon discussing with other frequent travellers who fly on the same route, I discovered that they too have the same complaint as I do.

I hope to see an improvement the next time I fly SIA.

I think business travellers tend to forget that SIA is not a flying gourmet restaurant, where one would expect promotional variety and a inflight chef to cater to one’s gastronomic whims like how you would like your steak medium or rare. They probably also forget that they’re not alone on a plane,  and with  other picky eaters on board it only makes sense for the catering unit to keep SIA’s inflight menu stable and safe enough for general consumption so that we won’t have passengers clogging the lavatories with their retching and excrement, or have wasted food weighing the plane down. Just think of all the resources spent on additional stringent quality checks just because some passenger decided that he would like his pork fried in tempura batter instead of pan-fried every once in a while. Most passengers aren’t frequent flyers either, so really, what’s monotonous prison food to you may be a culinary revelation to others. In fact, you should be thankful you have something decent to eat at all, unlike what SIA (previously MSA, or Malaysia-Singapore Airlines) had to show for in the past, as seen in this letter below dated 22 Aug 1970 ‘The food on MSA’s domestic flights’, ST.  But what’s more intriguing about the letter is how the level of sarcasm 40 years ago is almost indistinguishable from what we dish out nowadays.

 

Filed under: 1970s, 2010, Customer service, Local food, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fatter Singapore Girls will be a problem for many

Posted on October 16, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Stay lean, SIA girl’, 16 Oct 2010, Mailbag, Life! ST

(Tee Yee Chee): I don’t mean to be disrespectful or to discriminate but I honestly do not want to sit beside an overweight person during a long flight, especially when flying home.

Singapore Airlines did not become a leading airline just because the SIA girl looks slim, clean and pretty…It is easy to say you do not mind having a fatter Singapore Girl but it will be a problem for many.

This is like saying ‘I do not mean to be selfish, but I’m honestly taking the last parachute on the burning airplane.’ , or ‘I don’t mean to be racist, but I honestly prefer to sit next to people of my same race.’ What the hell does sitting beside an overweight passenger have anything to do with fat Singapore Girls? As far as I know, not having the privilege to fly with SQ notwithstanding,  flight attendants don’t sit next to passengers to chit chat idly and block people from shuffling out, and as for the inconvenience of accessing the aisles, she could be a beanpole or a behemoth and still take up the entire  passageway anyway as long as she’s pushing a trolley. And I don’t see why it’s so harrowing to sit next to fat people ‘especially when flying home’. Does having a fat person next to you mar your fond nostalgic mullings about home sweet home while tucking into a dinner that says ‘Traditional Fried Egg Noodles’ on the menu but tastes vaguely like Hokkien Mee?

First Yee Chee concedes that it takes more than the Singapore Girl image to sell the brand, but later turns around and says that fatter Singapore Girls will be a ‘problem for many’, without really explaining how or why. In the first place, if one already has preconceptions about the competency of fat people relative to their thinner peers, but wants to refrain from specifying out of political correctness,why even bother to bring it up?  Instead the writer confuses readers with his/her personal preferences of not being sandwiched by fat people in his seat, which really, has nothing to do with airline service, or how slim, clean and pretty the stewardesses are, and effectively shoots herself/himself in the foot, for instead of just targeting fat stewardesses, he/she ends up mocking fat people period. Contradicting arguments aside, the Saturday Mailbag column seems to have a freewheeling tolerance towards xenophobic, racist, discriminatory contributors, as seen in this rant against black French footballers.

 

 

Filed under: 2010, Singapore Airlines | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Next Page »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 170 other followers